Adam Roof v. Executive Office of Economic Development (SPR 20251750)

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Public Records Division Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records June 25, 2025 SPR25/1750 Robert J. McGovern, Esq. Deputy General Counsel Executive Office of Economic Development 1 Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Dear Attorney McGovern: On June 18, 2025, this office received your petition on behalf of the Executive Office of Economic Development (Office/EOED) seeking an extension of time to produce records and to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv); see also 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). As required by law, it is my understanding that the Office furnished a copy of the petition to the requestor, Adam Roof. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c); G. L.c. 66, § 10(d)(iv)(2). On June 3, 2025, Mr. Roof requested: All available and applicable email records that include the keywords noted below for [an identified individual], during his time as Assistant Secretary for Business Growth (between February 2015 and December 2018) and his time as Secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development (between December 2018 and January 2023). We are requesting emails sent to and from [an identified individual]. We also request available emails sent to and from [an identified individual] in his official roles as Co-Chair of the Massachusetts Life Sciences Center and Board Vice Chair of the Financial Services Advisory Council. Petition for an Extension of Time Under the Public Records Law, upon a showing of good cause, the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) may grant a single extension to an agency not to exceed 20 business days and a single extension to a municipality not to exceed 30 business days. In determining whether there has been a showing of good cause, the Supervisor shall consider, but shall not be limited to considering: (i) the need to search for, collect, segregate or examine records; (ii) the scope of redaction required to prevent unlawful disclosure; One Ashburton Place, Room 1719, Boston, Massachusetts 02108 • (617) 727-2832• Fax: (617) 727-5914 sec.state.ma.us/pre • pre@sec.state.ma.us

Robert J. McGovern, Esq. SPR25/1750 Page 2 June 25, 2025 (iii) the capacity or the normal business hours of operation of the agency or municipality to produce the request without the extension; (iv) efforts undertaken by the agency or municipality in fulfilling the current request and previous requests; (v) whether the request, either individually or as part of a series of requests from the same requestor, is frivolous or intended to harass or intimidate the agency or municipality; and (vi) the public interest served by expeditious disclosure. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c). If the Supervisor determines that the request is part of a series of contemporaneous requests that are frivolous or designed to intimidate or harass, and the requests are not intended for the broad dissemination of information to the public about actual or alleged government activity, the Supervisor may grant a longer extension or relieve the agency or municipality of its obligation to provide copies of the records sought. Id. The filing of a petition does not affect the requirement that a Records Access Officer (RAO) must provide an initial response to a requestor within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 36.06(4)(b). Request for Additional Time to Produce Records In its petition, the Office requests, “an extension of twenty (20) business days…” and states “[t]he nature of this search and review of a significant number of potentially responsive records means that EOED requires additional time to gather, segregate, and prepare the records for production.” In light of the need to collect and examine the records, and the capacity of the Office to produce the records without an extension, the Office has established good cause to permit an extension of time. G. L. c. 66, § 10(c)(i)-(iii). The Office is granted an extension of 20 business days. Petition to Assess Fees – Agencies A fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records (Supervisor) under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10 (d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). In rendering such a decision, the Supervisor is required to consider the following: a) the public interest served by limiting the cost of public access to the records; b) the financial ability of the requestor to pay the additional or increased fees; and c) any other relevant extenuating circumstances. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv).

Robert J. McGovern, Esq. SPR25/1750 Page 3 June 25, 2025 The statute sets out a two-prong test for determining whether the Supervisor may approve an agency’s petition to allow the agency to charge for time spent segregating or redacting records. The first prong is whether the request for records was made for a commercial purpose. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). It is my determination that this request was not made for a commercial purpose. The second prong of the test is whether the fee represents an actual and good faith representation by the agency to comply with the request. The Supervisor must consider 1) if the fee is necessary such that the request could not have been prudently completed without the redaction or segregation; 2) the amount of the fee is reasonable; and 3) the fee is not designed to limit, deter or prevent access to requested public records. Id. Petitions seeking a waiver of statutory limits to fees assessed to segregate and/or redact public records must be made within ten business days after receipt of a request for public records. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Fee Estimates – Agencies An agency may assess a reasonable fee for the production of a public record except those records that are freely available for public inspection. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d). The fees must reflect the actual cost of complying with a particular request. Id. A maximum fee of five cents ($.05) per page may be assessed for a black and white single or double-sided photocopy of a public record. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(i). Agencies may not assess a fee for the first four (4) hours of employee time to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce the record or records requested. G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ii). Where appropriate, agencies may include as part of the fee an hourly rate equal to or less than the hourly rate attributed to the lowest paid employee who has the necessary skill required to search for, compile, segregate, redact or reproduce a record requested, but the fee shall not be more than $25 per hour. Id. A fee shall not be assessed for time spent segregating or redacting records unless such segregation or redaction is required by law or approved by the Supervisor of Records under a petition under G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(iv). See G. L. c. 66, § 10(d)(ii); 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4). Current Petition The Office submitted its petition on June 18, 2025, more than ten business days after receipt of the request. In light of the fact that the Office has not demonstrated it submitted a timely petition, permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records cannot be granted. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(d). Conclusion Accordingly, I find that the Office has established good cause for a time extension of 20 business days as described above. However, in light of the fact that the Office has not

Robert J. McGovern, Esq. SPR25/1750 Page 4 June 25, 2025 demonstrated it submitted a timely fee petition, permission to charge for time spent segregating or redacting responsive records cannot be granted. 950 C.M.R. 32.06(4)(g). Please note, Mr. Roof has the right to seek judicial review of this decision by commencing a civil action in the appropriate superior court. See G. L. c. 66, §§ 10(c), 10(d)(iv)(4), 10A(c). Sincerely, Manza Arthur Supervisor of Records cc: Adam Roof